The Washington Post has a sensible editorial about welcoming Hosni Mubarak, Watch that Welcome.
Mr. Obama will not want to openly spurn the Egyptian leader. But it’s vital that he not grant Mr. Mubarak an unconditional invitation. Governments throughout the Middle East, and the many Arabs working for democratic change in their countries, will be watching to see if the Egyptian ruler gets a free pass. If he does, the administration will send the region the message that the corrupt old status quo — in which the United States backed Arab dictators in exchange for help with U.S. strategic interests — has been restored. That would inflict crippling damage on Mr. Obama’s attempt to restore U.S. credibility and prestige, particularly with the millions of secular, middle-class Arabs who chafe under corrupt autocracies.
The editorial opened with an observation that Mubarak had boycotted the United States during the second term of President Bush, because Bush pushed for real political reform. (No word if that boycott was just on visiting Washington or also of the $2 billion a year in aid the United States gives to Egypt as a reward for something Mubarak’s predecessor did. My guess is that Mubarak’s not nearly that principled.)
I’m usually wary of these editorials, because for the Washington Post (and especially columnist Jackson Diehl) the Muslim Brotherhood is dedicated to reform. Still, this editorial seemingly focuses on real reformers. The next paragraph is important:
Mr. Mubarak’s allies will argue that he deserves a reward for Egypt’s efforts to broker a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. But that diplomacy, which has yet to produce results, has been conducted entirely in line with Egypt’s interests. Cairo seeks to avert further warfare on its border, but it has also resisted decisive measures to stop the trafficking of weapons to Hamas. Domestic opponents who have sought to peacefully protest the government’s policy have been harshly suppressed.
That last sentence doesn’t quite fit. The two recent highly publicized arrests of the regime’s critics were protesting the in favor of Hamas.
Still the point is correct. There’s nothing altruistic about Egypt’s efforts at securing a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. And if Egypt were truly interested in peace it wouldn’t allow the arms smuggling in the first place. (For more on why Egypt doesn’t fight the arms smuggling effectively, see here.)
But President Obama has offered his hand in friendship to the Muslim world. He’s even decided to participate in Durban II. I can’t help feeling that “hope and change” in this regard means turning a blind eye to the dictators of the Arab world.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
